新创学术期刊评价探讨

A Discussion on the Evaluation of Newly Created Academic Journals

新创学术期刊与其他学术期刊相比,自身有一定的劣势:知名度低、影响力弱、好稿源少,但不少新创期刊也有内容新颖、独特、跨学科,办刊条件较好,上进性强等优点。新创学术期刊长期在现有"来源期刊"、"核心期刊"遴选中缺席,这对新创期刊的健康发展不利,也影响期刊遴选体系的纳优去劣,因此亟需针对新创学术期刊开展评价,以完善现有的"来源期刊"、"核心期刊"遴选体系。应用"全评价""六位一体"分析框架对新创期刊进行评价:评价目的是促进新创期刊的健康发展;评价主体是学科专家、编辑界专家等同行专家;评价客体是新创期刊,要根据"新刊"特点进行"分类"评价;评价方法是以同行专家定性评价法为主,定量评价法为辅;评价标准及指标主要评测"新刊"的潜力、实力和效力,注重主办机构、编辑部门、主编、论文作者等有关人的因素、能力的测评;评价制度全面保障评价活动的顺利开展,重点是建立同行专家动态遴选、监督制度,评价过程、评价结果公开化制度等。

Newly created academic journals have weaknesses in terms of popularity,influence and high quality contributions compared with long-established ones.On the other hand,however,many new academic journals have their own strengths,such as novel,unique and interdisciplinary in content,better in material conditions,and larger in space for improvement.But new academic journals in China have long been absent from various lists of source journals or core journals.This is beneficial neither for the development of new journals,nor for academic journals evaluation mechanisms to include the superior and remove the inferior.To overcome this shortage,a mechanism for evaluating new academic journals is an urgent need,which should comprise the following:a'six-in-one'analytical framework of evaluation with the purpose of promoting the sound development of emerging journals;evaluators consisted mainly of peer experts and editors with new journals as the evaluation object classified according to their characteristics;a method of qualitative analysis,supplemented by quantitative analysis;and evaluation standards focused on potentials,strengths and performance,with due attention paid also to human factors such as sponsors,editors,chief editors,contributors.The mechanism should guarantee the smooth running of the evaluation,especially the dynamic selection of peer experts,supervision and the transparency of evaluation process and outcome.